posted
Note: While you read this keep in mind that I have only read the Ender-Bean books.
I was in the middle of reading Shadow of the Giant, when a thought, or rather a question popped into my head and so far, has refused to leave. So since I haven't got much else to do I have decided to post it here. The question is; What makes Orson Scott Card such a good author?
What is it that makes his books so compelling that they are near impossible to put down?
And after thinking about it for a while this is what I have come up with:
I think that his books are so good because they are easy to relate too.I know this is far-fetched, I mean how many of us have ever been in space or faced an alien life form in battle? Not very many... But, I dont mean things like that, I mean the emotions, the desires... They say that what makes a singer good is if you can feel what he is feeling through the song. (Singer not Music) If you can feel his pain or his happiness or whatever...and I think that in Orson Scott Card's books you can do just that.
I mean, when I read Ender's game I was shattered when he found out the game was real, even though I had know it all along. And when I read Shadow Pupppets I fell in love with Bean right along woth Petra and was happy with her when he finally agreed to marriage and children, and then torn when they were stolen by Achilles.
Which brings me to another point, his charecter's are very connectible...You befriend them and slowly come to love them. To want them to be happy, to hate the ones that make them sad. When I read Ender's game I was scared for Ender that day in the bathroom where he had to face Bonzo. I was heartbroken when I found out that he could never go home.
One more thing I also enjoy reading these because I know how many times people have ignored my suggestions because of my age and it is very satisfying to see people triumph over this barrier.
Those are my opinions anyway..What do you think?
Oh..and it would be nice to hear what Orson Scott Card himself thought of my obssesive rantings...even though there isn't actually a question here..for I have come to see him as some kind of I don't know legend, idol...something of the sort..
Those are my thoughts, wether you agree with them or not I cannot change them... but please post!
posted
What I like about Orson Scott Card's stories is that his characters, despite being in science fictional settings are still human.
Posts: 681 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
for me the reason i can't put any of the books down is the way they flow.
Obviously i become extremely connected to the characters, i found myself with tears slipping down my cheeks in SotG when Peter was reading Beans letter to petra. and numerous other times in other books of his. His characters are so lovable, but the reason they are so lovable is the way the writing flows.
I read an awful lot of Science fiction and fantsay novels and find many of them, while great books in their own right, i fail to connect deeply with the characters due to writing going all over the place.
The way Mr.Card writes is like a gentle stream in the summer time, falling slowly, but with purpose, toward the sea.
ofcourse the stories themselves are full of action and happenings but the style of wrting is soft, gentle and flowing.
At least in my opinion.
Also, who doesn't wish they could save the world??
Posts: 19 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I never cry in the movies and neither I was doing it in the books. But with Mr. Card I'm surprised crying when Ender dies, not because he dies, is when Plink says when she writes about him. Even in lovelock, while Iwas saying to me itself " But if only it is a monkey! ". He does that we love the characters and we fell the same of them.
Also it's for the music, when I end a scene of action I'm surprised for the silence that it's around me, though I know perfectly that before it was the same.And on having finished is like a cadence, of a song that is ended. Few writers can do it, but it comes so deeply as the music...
Posts: 111 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I feel that it's the simplicity. There's no need to be super descriptive because my mind fills in those blanks. If something is unnecessary for the story, it is not there. If it is necessary, it is included.
Also there's a flow to the story which I have yet to understand.
Posts: 169 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would like to reiterate what Epictetus said. It’s the characters and how real they are.
The stories are told with a sense of truth. Even though the story and the characters are lies in the sense that they are made up, their essence is based on truth.
Much of what I see in pop culture media from television and Hollywood demonstrate utter cluelessness to that concept. I wouldn’t say that OSC is the only writer that adheres to the truth of a character but I do think he does it better than anyone else I’ve read.
He dives into their mind more than most. Not necessarily deeply but enough so the reader can understand and form a relationship. And these numerous character nuances are always relevant to what is needed for the story to progress. The character feels real and thinks like a real person.
I never really feel like the characters are put in situations where they spend the entire time reacting to things that happen around them but never affecting an outcome. Like for instance any disaster movie. He always engages the characters to act and change the course of events.
Posts: 527 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's all about the characters, everything is told not only through their eyes, like puppets as most authors use them, but through their heart (I'm sorry if that was too cliche). Unlike how most books are written, battles involving the characters, or adventures with the characters, in OSC's books, it's always following the character, and being portrayed through the character, they aren't tools of a story about a space battle, they're players in the stories of their life, where they have to go through a space battle.
OSC's writing stands out the most because of how he tells about the characters, not the battles with the characters in them.
posted
Very few books I've read have captivated my thought and feeling as have Speaker for the Dead and Xenocide. I count them as books on philosophy and humanity. Each time I listen to them, I get something more out of them. The only other non-scriptural book I listen to with such frequency is Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.
I think, Mr Card has writen the Hive Queen and The Life of Human. Those stories are there in the text.
As for the Hegemon: I can see where it would be difficult to have such empathy with someone like Peter. But like someone said in a biography about Gen. MacAurthur, He's arrogant and ambitious, but would you want to go into battle with someone who thought he was second string?
I've yet to get Shadow of the Giant. I'm waiting for it to come out in audio form. I assume there will be more about Peter in there.
Finally, to best describe how I feel about Mr. Cards work, the lines from a song come to mind.
"Strumming my pain with his fingers... telling my life with his words".
I know that may sound silly, but... well... for example: Pipo's conversation with Novinia got to me the first time I read it. I had a hard time liking the later 'adult' Novinia, but Pipo's understanding and compassion for that injured little one... well, I envied it.
Posts: 29 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It also helps that he actually treats his readers like they have at least some intelligence. Unlike some other authors I have come across.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't care aboyut style or way he writes I care about the writings the sroey the characters the awsomeness of the books.
Posts: 86 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If any of yall havent seen the new battle star galactica series, you would probably like it too for much of the same reasons I've seen stated here.
The heros in it, while basically good, are still human and all have their own personal vices.
Even Ender, who of course has his own inner conflicts, almost always acts in a morally conciencsable way. The characters in battle star don't always do that.
Posts: 375 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the forward to my edition of EG, OSC writes about a letter he recieved from a group of kids who were reading Ender's Game as a college course...while still in high school.
In short, that was me. At the tie I first read Ender's Game, I was those kids. And at the same time, I was and still am, Ender.
I don't want to sound like I'm tooting my own horn, but the comparison holds. I am literally one of the best, if not THE best, in my field. I win all the awards, I win all the games. I lead others to do the same and they follow me because they know I can lead them.
But I am also outside of them, just as Ender was. Except to a select few (my own Alais), I am "tha guy" who leads the team, someone to be looked up to, someone to be RESPECTED. But to so many, I'm not the guy you'd invite to the party, to something outside of our field.
And, like Ender, I've never really lost. Which is why it hit Ender so hard in the end. He never lost a single game. He may have tried to lose, but in the end he still won the game. But he ultimately lost when he found out the game was real. I have never lost in anything I've done.
So, in short, OSC's writings attracted me because he wrote about me. Not a version of me, but ME.
Posts: 49 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: And, like Ender, I've never really lost. Which is why it hit Ender so hard in the end. He never lost a single game. He may have tried to lose, but in the end he still won the game. But he ultimately lost when he found out the game was real. I have never lost in anything I've done
I hate to feed the ego, but I gotta ask - what field is that exactly? I am overcome with need to know.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you can redefine "lost" as events happen. You may set out to win a marathon, come in 40th, but then decide you won because it was a learning experience and you will be better prepared next time.
posted
Well, I haven't read all the replied posts to this yet, becuase I'm rather lazy right now, but the most interesting thing I find about the series, are the characters.
His languages is easy to comprehend and it's interesting enough content, but the ultimate idea behind his stories are the <u>characters</u>
OSC uses his characters in amazing ways, he makes you love them, or love to hate them. He wraps things together in single ideas with his characters so that the reader gets to actually know the character. The plotlines are good enough I guess, but its the characters that draws you in. What happens to the character? What process do they go through to make their goals work?
Things like this are what draw me in. The fascination of a being like Achilles, the stalwart upbringing of Ender, the underdog outlook of Bean (Regardless whether or not he really IS the underdog), the uniqueness of Olhado, the comparisons of Miro and Ender.
I can go on for interesting things about things of the sort, but it's the characters that create OSC's outstanding works.
Posts: 9 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
His characters are human, a believable mix of good and bad. The pacing of his books is nice and fast, I think. The moral dilemas he creates are wonderfully horrible.
Posts: 159 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: I don't want to sound like I'm tooting my own horn, but the comparison holds. I am literally one of the best, if not THE best, in my field. I win all the awards, I win all the games. I lead others to do the same and they follow me because they know I can lead them.
quote: Wow dude. You might get invited to that party if you didn't toot your own horn like that.
quote: Yeah. I've often heard Scott mention you as his inspiration.
It is fine for him to make this comment if it is true. If he can't point this out at Hatrack, where can he? I don't think he was trying to brag. He talked about the negative consequences of being the best at what he does as well. If his experience is the same as Ender's then it is.
Descartes, this is an illustration of the problem, isn't it? (unless they meant their comments more light-hearted than I am interpreting them--which may be the case). If you excel beyond all others and admit that it is true, people tear you down for it. Hey, that happened to Ender too! You really ARE Ender!
BTW, I am successful enough to get by, but I have failed at most things I have tried, so I am not sticking up for "one of my own." I was friends with a guy once who was a lot like Descartes, and while there was great reward in being the best, there was a very real, depressing isolation that came with it. When he fell down to normal he felt like a failure. He felt like he COULDN"T fail and was depressed, at times suicidal. While I hope that guy made some kind of paradigm shift and had some kind of healthier belief that he didn't always have to be perfect (he didn't have to save the world), his situation wasn't just from arrogance. It was a real struggle for him. Descartes' post reminded me of him, so I guess that's why I'm sticking up for that post.
Posts: 159 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Descartes, this is an illustration of the problem, isn't it? (unless they meant their comments more light-hearted than I am interpreting them--which may be the case). If you excel beyond all others and admit that it is true, people tear you down for it. Hey, that happened to Ender too! You really ARE Ender!
I think the problem is more that most people here are smarter than their peer group, so when someone is claiming to be the smartest of the smart, people automatically want to shut that down.
That....is the sound....of inevitability, Mr. Anderson.
True or not (and how could you prove it in an online forum?), it's impossible to make a claim like that without appearing unimaginably arrogant.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, I'm specifically objecting to his whole "I am Ender" bit. Because I know who OSC based -- or claims to have based -- Ender on, and it wasn't this random guy.
quote: Actually, I'm specifically objecting to his whole "I am Ender" bit. Because I know who OSC based -- or claims to have based -- Ender on, and it wasn't this random guy.
That was the part I didn't object to. I thought he was being like "I am Tiger Woods". Not literally declaring that he was the basis for the character, just that he drew strong parallels between Ender's life and his own.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Wow.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
